Simon Heffer does Red Ken's work for him

"It was decided, presumably by one of the advertising men who now control the Conservatives, that the only way to beat an act was with another, even better one. They certainly went to the right man."

"There were stooges when Mr Johnson was en route to be president of the Oxford Union. He has had stooges all through journalism, who did significant parts of his various jobs for him, usually with little thanks or reward. And now there are stooges in politics."

"One of Mr Johnson's failings is a belief that the public is there to serve him, not vice versa."

"Would a Johnson mayoralty be yet one more chapter in an epic of charlatanry"?

"The guiding theme of his life is the charm of doing nothing properly."

"He is pushy, he is thoughtless, he is indiscreet about his private life."

All of those attacks appear in Simon Heffer's column today. Mr Heffer criticises Ken Livingstone and Brian Paddick but the bulk of his acid is retained for Boris.

Boris isn't perfect. Project Cameron isn't perfect. ConservativeHome has often been critical of the direction of the Conservative Party but, as noted before, we'd much rather have the Conservatism of Mr Cameron than that of Mr Heffer. We hope our critiques are constructive and well-timed.

Mr Heffer, in contrast, appears to be determined to undermine the Conservative Party at every opportunity.

Ken Livingstone stands for everything The Telegraph should disdain. He has raised taxes, gummed up London with bureaucracy, attacked private charity, embraced Muslim extremists and forged links with odious dictators.

We predict - with all our efforts - that Boris will win tomorrow. Despite the best efforts of Simon Heffer.

Comments

I normally look forward to reading Simon Heffer's column in the Daily Telegraph, but on the bus this morning on the way to work I was so angry when reading it. I sometimes wonder what Simon Heffer wants; does he want four more years of Red Ken or the Lib Dem's running London?

Richard - you are naive. Heffer hates Cameron because our leader is sunny, optimistic and willing to be pragmatic.

Heffer, in contrast, is a sour, misanthropic ultra whose unusual brand of 'Conservatism' is more of a rationalisation of his repellant personality than a philosphy. The fact that he's happy to help a Marxist like Livingstone by stabbing Boris on the eve of the election demonstrates his lack of responsibility to the ideas he claims to uphold.

Why is anyone surprised? Heffer has been our enemy for some considerable time. He appears in a UKIP video praising that party. He spoke well on Brown at a time of great peril for this party last year.

Heffer is a traitor to the Conservative cause. One Conservative MP told the Telegraph that he was a sleeping marxist (or similar), they laughed at that. Then Heffer comes out for Red Ken and the truth is revealed. Heffer prefers a neo marxist than a Conservative.

Someone please save the Telegraph. It is fast becoming a joke with Red Heffer and the ex Mirror journalist.

We have two heads that require displaying on pikes on London Bridge. Livingstone is the first of these and his head will lead inexorably, IF Livingstone is de-capital-ated, to the head of all things NuLabour.

Shame really. Heffer was on the money on St.George’s Day but has since disassociated himself from any coherently lucid form of reality.

Incidentally, a heifer is calfless cow. A load of bullocks and bum steers come to mind.

Simon Heffer is quite correct when he says "both Labour and the Tories insult hard-pressed, overtaxed residents of London by failing to give them serious, strong-minded candidates to vote for tomorrow". Politics has become like football - win at all costs - with voters like moronic fans blindly supporting their team, their party, their candidate. Politics is the big loser.
I have used my postal ballot to vote for the Conservative candidate in the Assembly election and I have abstained in the mayoral vote.

I have recently returned to the Sceptic Isle having been away for a few weeks. I have read that during that time Boris is said (in a Have I Got News For You moment) that he will give or supports an amnesty for illegal immigrants. I would assume that if that is so that it would have been agreed and cleared by Dave.
Is this statement of intent by Boris true. I wish to know because I will be definitely voting tomorrow? Please advise.

Heffer would condemn us in London (in wehich he does not live) to a further period of rule by a crook whose power base is islamic jihadists, (who hate gays) and illogically gays (though Paddick may have diminished this one on the 1st preference vote!) , irish republicans, and all GLC subsidised pressure groups for all extremist ethnic groups.

Pity because Heffer is normally very sound.

He shoots us in the back today and urges abstention. If one wants to make a demo, vote 1st preference BNP [That'll infuriate the journos] who won't win a place and then 2nd preference Boris - to get rid of Livingstone. But that needs the kind of brilliant lateral thinking for which I'm noted!

Dontmakemelaugh:
Boris made the comments in regard to the fact that London boroughs are chronically underfunded because the Government consistently undercounts the number of illegal immigrants living in the city. Therefore the services provided are stretched to the absolute limit and residents suffer the consequences.

Boris's comments were his own and are actually in opposition to those of DC and the Conservative Party. No Mayor of London has any power over immigration policy, so there is no chance that any sort of amnesty will be implemented any time soon.

Bah, Mr Heffer is a dinosaur. World has changed fundamentally and the choice is either to embrace it and get in poll position for taking advantage of the change or moan and pretend to be back in the 19th Century with Empire and all. I can't see Heffer ever liking the Conservative party under Cameron, probably thinks it's too "progressive".

If Mr Heffer liked the Tory candidate for London then everyone could be certain that that candidate would lose the election, and probably get less votes than the Green party. London is a unique case and Londoners have different views to the rest of the country due to their unique environment and population make up. Heffer would prefer a Hard Socialist or Far Right Mayor as it would be familiar, maybe he should move to Rome.

Thank you Elisabeth for your reply. It doesn't say much for Boris does it? It would appear that some of what Heff writes could be true? Well I never? Never mind the width - feel the cloth!

Come on you lot! It is about time you told those expensively parked (Conservative ?) bums in Westminster what you will not vote for. Sometimes you have to retreat and regroup in order to win in the end, but you wont win by trying to kid people.

Heffer hasn't done Ken's work, as you so pompously wittered above. All he's done is told, to Telegraph readers, the plain truth about Boris. Boris *is* all the things Heffer has said and more - and more power to the Telegraph for understanding that the proper relationship to the Party, for those not literally in the pay of CCHQ, is to stand outside CCHQ.

As for your own description of your own 'critiques' as being "constructive and well-timed" - well golly, what an impressively good opinion you have of yourself. Some might consider your 'critiques' to be tame, yet utterly factional (hullo smug, self-righteous, indescribably creepy evangelical sectaries), and where necessary laced with deceit.

Now of course you'll get characteristically huffy about that last point, but what otherwise can we call the man immodest enough to call himself the 'voice of the grass roots', but who also knew better than those selfsame grassroots when their voice shouldn't be heard (cf, your infamous covering up of the deservedly low opinion party members had of Dave before the last Conference?)

Heffer made of Boris the entirely valid point that he, like Dave, is man not motivated by either higher principle or some concept of public service. All that unites both men, and too many of their intimates, is dull, personal ambition. And what exactly is in that for the rest of us? You know, those of us silly or lazy enough to lack their relentless, fairly soulless desire for self-aggrandizement?

Of course Ken should be done away with by the voters of London, for exactly the bad things he's done in office - but as has been said time after time during this campaign, Crosby's genius has been to deny us anything by way of specifics about how, plausibly, Bojo's regime would differ from Ken's. So here's a prediction: fewer Socialist Action entryists, more Etonians, and that's about it. No serious spending cuts, nothing by way of our tax handed back, no effort made to devolve power away from City Hall and back to the boroughs where it belongs, no pretence that the Congestion Charge is anything other than a poll tax dressed up in modish ecological garb.

By all means vote Boris as a means of getting rid of Ken, it's without doubt the lesser of two disagreeable prospects. But the man you'll be getting as Mayor is exactly the man described to you by Simon Heffer.

you must not assume that heffer is a tory. like myself i believe that he is a disenfranchised former tory. we chaps in our fifties have nothing in common with cameron and his front bench. i believe that if elected the party carries on with NL spending for at least 2 years and what did maude say about tax cuts in the first 4 years? complete nonsense!

I gave up buying the Speccie whilst Boris was Editor. He does very little for me. I still get the Telegraph and enjoy some if not all Heffer's contributions. If I had a vote (and thankfully I quit London some time ago) I would certainly not vote for Livingstone. If I did vote for Boris it would be from duty not desire.

PS

The more unpleasant comments on this thread are sadly quite revealing.

Mr Heffer is a tragedy (the same label applied to Brown by a Labour backbencher). He is forever fated to live in a time warp, reminiscing about a golden age that never existed, and spouting bitter bilge about anyone who isn't Margaret Thatcher.

"The guiding theme of his life is the charm of doing nothing properly."

Yes, Simon, and the guiding theme of yours is to be a miserable, boring old sod who thinks he's purer than anyone else. A man who thinks owning a big head and a 'holier than thou' attitude makes him important. Grow up, it was amusing to begin with but now it's just depressing (again, like Brown).

Heffer is a bitter, twisted and hateful man stuck with out of date views and blunt perspective. His insecure writing stems from the simple fact that he is ugly, fat and inherently nasty. A playground school bully who goes on the offensive to protect himself. Luckily everyone sees through this.

There's people working their hearts out for the party at the moment, including working 24/7 to get a CONSERVATIVE elected as London mayor and councillors all round the country, and it's bearing fruit with 40%+ in the polls and positive feedback, only for lazy misery guts like Heffer to stick a spanner in the works.

His piece, like most of his, is negative and spiteful, and also attention-seeking (it's worked, judging by all our reactions on here).

Heffer is your typical comment jounalist; smug, divorced from reality, and the owner of an ego the size of a small country.

Most of his comments are based on what? Nothing but his own petty, personal differences. It's pretty pathetic, lazy journalism.

Why doesn't he do something constructive like walk the streets and deliver leaflets and get a real sense of what people are feeling by knocking on doors and canvassing?

He won't because he's safe in his ivory Telegraph tower, where none of his stubborn beliefs are tested and the doughnuts are free.

I normally enjoy Simon Heffer's column, but this time I really did wonder what on earth had got into him.
I, also, had forgotten that Boris took the rap for a column that Heffer had actually written. This reminder of his cowardice just makes his latest column really stick in one's craw.
Perhaps it's time the Daily Telegraph had a little word.

Unlike most of the above commentators I do not presume to read Simon Heffer on a regular basis. However, on this occasion he has hit the right button. If Boris wins in London it will be a victory for the Conservatives marketing men and Lynton Crosby. Nobody else. If the Conservative party is ever going to regain the support of people in the North of England it needs to show it has something more than slick soundbites and marketing gimmicks in its armoury.

I wonder if we could, pace Liverpool, drop this etiolated piffle that leader writers are to blame for what their editors tell them to write? Following orders is an all too viable defence in this instance, should one feel that deploring Liverpool is somehow actually mistaken.

It's good to know that you've reached a new doctrine. Namely that, every Tory with access to a newspaper column must at all times, in all elections, for every duly selected Tory candidate, support said candidate. It'll be fun reading Tebbit and IDS's views as and when Mark MacGregor ends up with a seat.

I thought that it may have been a shade hyperbolic as an article, but it did have some relevant points. Wholly unscientific I know, but I have asked a number of people who work with me in Canary Wharf how they'll vote. This should be rock solid Tory investment banking territory.

What's interesting is that yes, there are a fair number who will vote for Boris, but many just think it's a good laugh. Quite a few have real reservations about his capability to run the most powerful financial services centre on earth. I just hope he'll do a Ken (who has been a good mayor for the City) and leave us all alone. Time will tell after tomorrow.